Dry Needling with the Use of FRSc Technique in Addition to Standard Rehabilitation Program for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial Using Both PROMs and Measurement Tools.

Purpose: Dry needling (DN) has gained popularity for musculoskeletal conditions, but its commercial use often surpasses scientific evidence. The novel Five Regulatory Systems Concept (FRSc) of DN shows potential therapeutic mechanisms, including chronic low back pain (LBP). However, rigorous clinical assessment with patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and objective measures are necessary. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of DN according to pain levels, postural control and selected gait parameters in patients with chronic LBP. Patients and Methods: This prospective, double-blinded, randomized controlled study involved 30 patients with LBP allocated in the experimental (n=15, rehabilitation+ FRSc DN) or control group (n=15, rehabilitation + sham DN). The Roland-Morris questionnaire (RMQ) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) were used as PROMs. Moreover, the posturography method for posture and balance control and the treadmill for gait analysis were used as objective tools. Measurements were taken before and immediately after the intervention and during 1- and 3-month follow up. Results: There was a statistically significantly greater improvement in the RMQ in the experimental group compared to the controls (p=0.923 before and p<0.001 after treatment, as well as p<0.001 after 1 and 3 months). Despite the favorable analgesic effect, a significant advantage of the experimental group over the controls in this respect is worth noting (p=0.001 in favor of DN in all intergroup comparisons concerning results from the subjective assessment of pain (VAS). A statistically insignificant post-treatment improvement in balance and postural stability was noted in both groups, although the effects appeared to be short-term. Surprisingly, again, DN had no advantage over sham interventions. In both groups, all changes in the swing phase were statistically insignificant (p=0.201 for the dominant and p=0.283 for the non-dominant side) for the initial swing phase. In both groups, all changes in the stance phase were statistically insignificant (p=0.480 for the dominant and p=0.410 for the non-dominant side of the body). Conclusion: DN based on the FRSc appears promising as an effective adjunct to standard rehabilitation for LBP, showing improvements in functional performance and pain reduction.

The effectiveness of dry needling in patients with chronic low back pain: a prospective, randomized, single-blinded study.

Dry needling (DN) is a standard procedure for treating musculoskeletal disorders. However, there are no clear recommendations for using DN in low back pain (LBP). Therefore, this study aimed to assess the effectiveness of the novel DN program for reducing pain intensity and improving functional efficiency in patients with chronic LBP. A group of 40 patients with chronic LBP due to the L5-S1 discopathy were eligible and randomized into experimental (n = 20) and control (n = 20) groups. The DN program was performed for the experimental group according to the Five Regulatory Systems (FRS) concept. The control group received sham therapy using placebo needles. DN sessions were performed twice a week for 4 weeks. A single needling application lasted 60 min. Both groups received standard treatment and physical exercise of LBP for 1 month. Subjective pain was measured by a visual analog scale (VAS), functional efficiency was assessed with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and the lower spine range of motion was measured with the Schober test. There were significant differences in pain reduction (VAS) in both groups (p < 0.001). The strongest analgesic effect in the DN group yielded 6.45 points immediately after the therapy, 6.2 points after 1 month, and 6 points after 3 months. The DN group scored higher VAS reduction than the control group (p < 0.001). There were significant differences in the functional state (ODI) in the experimental group (p < 0.001). There was a significant ODI decrease by 18.1 points, after 1 month by 18.9 points, and after 3 months by 17.6 points. No significant differences were found in the control group (p > 0.05). Intergroup differences were observed in the functional efficiency in ODI in all measurement time-points (p < 0.001). There were significant differences in the range of motion (Schober test) in the DN group (main effect: p < 0.001). For all measurements, differences (p < 0.001) were observed in favor of DN compared to the control. In conclusion, DN program according to the FRS concept stands for the novel treatment method supplemented by an exercise program, effectively reducing pain and improving functional efficiency in LBP patients.

Efficacy of Focused Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy in Chronic Low Back Pain: A Prospective Randomized 3-Month Follow-Up Study.

BACKGROUND Extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) is a modern physiotherapeutic method that is useful for treating musculoskeletal conditions. There are still limited data from well-designed studies evaluating the clinical efficiency of ESWT in low back pain (LBP). Therefore, this study aimed to assess the effectiveness of the focused ESWT (fESWT) in reducing pain and improving the functional status of patients with chronic LBP. MATERIAL AND METHODS The study involved 40 patients with L5-S1 discopathy with chronic LBP pain who were randomized into 2 groups: group A (n=20, mean age of 42.3±13.1 years) and group B (n=20, mean age of 45.4±14 years). Group A was an experimental group treated with an fESWT at the lumbar and sacral spine (0.15 mJ/mm², 1000 pulses, 4 Hz). Group B was a control group, treated with a sham fESWT. The treatment protocol in both groups included identical stabilization training (45 minutes, once a day, 5 days a week). Study outcomes included subjective pain with a visual analog scale (VAS) and Laitinen Pain Scale (LPS), and functional status using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Measurements were made before and after treatments, as well as follow-up observations at 1 and 3 months following ESWT. The study was prospectively registered at the ISRCTN registry platform (no. ISRCTN13785224). RESULTS There was a significant analgesic effect (VAS and LPS) in both groups; however, it was significantly greater in the experimental group compared to the sham group (P<0.05). A more significant decrease in the perceived pain (VAS and LPS) was observed immediately after the active fESWT therapy. In follow-up observations (after 1 and 3 months), there were no significant between-group differences (P>0.05). Also, there was a significant effect in terms of functional state (ODI) for both groups (P<0.05); however, between-group comparisons revealed no statistically significant differences (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS Focused ESWT with an exercise program can be effective in patients with chronic LBP. ESWT allows reducing pain, although it does not seem to significantly improve a patient's functional state.

The Effectiveness Of Radial Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy In Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain: A Prospective, Randomized, Single-Blinded Pilot Study.

PURPOSE: This prospective, randomized and single-blinded study assesses the influence of radial extracorporeal shock wave therapy (rESWT) in patients with low back pain (LBP). METHODS: A total of 52 patients with LBP were enrolled in the study, out of which a homogeneous group of 40 patients with mean age of 53.45±4.9 years was included. Patients were randomized into group A (n=20) treated with rESWT (2000 pulses; 2.5 bars; 5 Hz, 7 mins) performed twice a week for five weeks (10 sessions) and stabilization training, as well as group B (n=20) treated with sham rESWT and stabilization training. To analyze the therapeutic progress, the following tests were performed (before and after therapy; 1 and 3 months follow-up) to assess pain and functional efficiency: (1) Visual Analog Scale (VAS), (2) Laitinen Pain Scale (LPS), and (3) Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). RESULTS: The control group had a statistically significant advantage over the rESWT group (4.4 vs. 3.1 points on the VAS; p=0.039). However, in long-term observations, group A gradually experienced more pain relief than group B (2.7 vs. 3.5 points, p>0.05, at one month and 2.0 vs. 4.4 points at three months after treatment; p<0.0001). Similar findings can be seen in the analysis of changes in pain sensations measured with the LPS. The functional state (ODI) was better in rESWT group, especially in follow-up observation (9.3 vs. 14.6 points, p=0.033, at one month and 9.3 vs. 17.8 points, p=0.004, at three months after treatment). CONCLUSION: The rESWT combined with stabilization training is particularly effective in the long-term and achieves a stable beneficial effect for patients with LBP. The use of rESWT has a significant long-term influence on the reduction of pain and the improvement of the general functional state in relation to the conventional motor improvement program.

Photobiomodulation using high- or low-level laser irradiations in patients with lumbar disc degenerative changes: disappointing outcomes and remarks.

BACKGROUND: Laser therapy seems to be a beneficial physical agent for chronic low back pain (LBP), and it is commonly used in the clinical rehabilitation practice. However, there are still no indisputable and clearly defined protocols and practical guidelines, and further, the methodology of the previous reports leaves many unsatisfied and raises some reservations. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) and high-intensity laser therapy (HILT) in patients with lumbar disc degenerative changes based on the analysis of the short- and long-term results and in comparison with the placebo effect. DESIGN: This study was a prospective and placebo-controlled clinical trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A group of 68 participants were qualified for the therapy and were assigned to four comparative groups in the order they volunteered: HILT of 1,064 nm, 60 J/cm2, 10 minutes (HILT); sham (HILT placebo); LLLT of 785 nm, 8 J/cm2, 8 minutes; and sham (LLLT placebo). The following tests were used to assess the effectiveness of treatment: 1) the visual analogue scale; 2) the Laitinen Questionnaire Indicators of Pain; 3) the Oswestry Disability Index; 4) the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire; 5) Lasegue test; and 6) Schober's test. All measurements were carried out before and after irradiations (3 weeks) and in follow-ups (1 and 3 months). RESULTS: After applying verum or placebo laser irradiation, therapeutic progress was observed in all comparative groups; however, no statistically significant differences were observed among the procedures. CONCLUSION: The high- and low-energy laser therapy methods used in the present article are ineffective in relation to patients with lumbar disc degenerative changes in both the short- and long-term perspectives and do not show a significant advantage over the placebo effect.

Efficacy of Selected Electrical Therapies on Chronic Low Back Pain: A Comparative Clinical Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND In the currently available research publications on electrical therapy of low back pain, generally no control groups or detailed randomization were used, and such studies were often conducted with relatively small groups of patients, based solely on subjective questionnaires and pain assessment scales (lacking measurement methods to objectify the therapeutic progress). The available literature also lacks a comprehensive and large-scale clinical study. The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of treating low back pain using selected electrotherapy methods. The study assesses the influence of individual electrotherapeutic treatments on reduction of pain, improvement of the range of movement in lower section of the spine, and improvement of motor functions and mobility. MATERIAL AND METHODS The 127 patients qualified for the therapy (ultimately, 123 patients completed the study) and assigned to 6 comparison groups: A - conventional TENS, B - acupuncture-like TENS, C - high-voltage electrical stimulation, D - interferential current stimulation, E - diadynamic current, and F - control group. RESULTS The research showed that using electrical stimulation with interferential current penetrating deeper into the tissues results in a significant and more efficient elimination of pain, and an improvement of functional ability of patients suffering from low back pain on the basis of an analysis of both subjective and objective parameters. The TENS currents and high voltage were helpful, but not as effective. The use of diadynamic currents appears to be useless. CONCLUSIONS Selected electrical therapies (interferential current, TENS, and high voltage) appear to be effective in treating chronic low back pain.

Kinesiology Taping does not Modify Electromyographic Activity or Muscle Flexibility of Quadriceps Femoris Muscle: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Pilot Study in Healthy Volleyball Players.

BACKGROUND: Kinesiology taping (KT) is a popular method of supporting professional athletes during sports activities, traumatic injury prevention, and physiotherapeutic procedures after a wide range of musculoskeletal injuries. The effectiveness of KT in muscle strength and motor units recruitment is still uncertain. The objective of this study was to assess the effect of KT on surface electromyographic (sEMG) activity and muscle flexibility of the rectus femoris (RF), vastus lateralis (VL), and vastus medialis (VM) muscles in healthy volleyball players. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty-two healthy volleyball players (8 men and 14 women) were included in the study and randomly assigned to 2 comparative groups: "kinesiology taping" (KT; n=12; age: 22.30 ± 1.88 years; BMI: 22.19 ± 4.00 kg/m(2)) in which KT application over the RF muscle was used, and "placebo taping" (PT; n=10; age: 21.50 ± 2.07 years; BMI: 22.74 ± 2.67 kg/m(2)) in which adhesive nonelastic tape over the same muscle was used. All subjects were analyzed for resting sEMG activity of the VL and VM muscles, resting and functional sEMG activity of RF muscle, and muscle flexibility of RF muscle. RESULTS: No significant differences in muscle flexibility of the RF muscle and sEMG activity of the RF, VL, and VM muscles were registered before and after interventions in both groups, and between the KT and PT groups (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The results show that application of the KT to the RF muscle is not useful to improve sEMG activity.